About Me

Thursday, 5 March 2015

The Army - Dismissing The Squad

This week I
have revisited Adrian Goldsworthy's book "In The Name of Rome - The Men
Who Won The Roman Empire" which also tells how the Roman Army changed over
the centuries from The Republic to the end of Empire. At the same time the exploring the newly available
digitised and indexed newspapers of the past has led to findings probably
impossible in the past.

One it that
far from being the law abiding and respectable lot claimed by parents and
grandparents there are a few ancestors who were up before the local
magistrates. Thumping neighbours
(Clydeside), game laws (Antrim), unlicensed beer selling (Worcester) perhaps
reflect to some extent the local cultures.

What was
unexpected was that one, at first thought to be just a local businessman doing
moderately well, was a militia officer in Lancashire, who turned out to deal
with local workers striking for higher wages and the right to vote. But all in one way or another saw some kind
of service.

In the last
half century the British Army has gone from being widely based, sometimes more
professional sometimes less, to what is now claimed to be almost wholly
professional, even the Reserve has to meet the relevant standards and the
Reserve is not large.

In the last
couple of decades it has been cut and trimmed and cut again. This is not the only feature. Whether it has been because of the complex
science and technology behind the gear or the radical change in support systems
and provision what happens behind the front line is very different.

Looking at the
Roman example the Army was the cutting edge of the free male population all of
whom were liable for service. It was a
society in which war was normal and service part of being Roman and an
honourable and respected duty. It was an
integral part of living and life.

Even when it later
became a largely professional force, these ideas held some force although by
the end of Empire had declined. Now it
seems almost that the UK government is attempting the reverse, reducing the
professional army to one dependent on other support and men who make themselves
available for duty.

But this is an
entirely different world. There are two
key problems now, one is are the men there, the other is of the men around just
how many of them are capable of serving? It is likely, looking at the UK as it
is and the generation in question that they are not to be had and one reason is
that now so few are capable.

Moreover, now
that any semblance has gone of a military ethos or awareness of history and the
need to be ready and aware of the threats of the world there is little
incentive for either service or the support of service. We are gulled into thinking that somehow we
can be sheltered from and avoid predators and potential attackers.

Our
governments have not helped by using what is left of our forces to what amount to
occasional forays into foreign crises where they are the led and not the
leaders and there to make up the numbers.
Indeed there are brave men serving their calling but they are now a
marginal contributor in the greater scheme of things.

Returning to
Ancient Rome and the campaigns and wars what is striking is the numbers of men
involved and over long periods. Often it
seems as though Ancient Rome could easily and readily put many more men in the
field and more effectively than our rich nation with a population of over 60
million.

When that
Empire eventually collapsed spending too much of its gold buying off enemies
and inflating the currency, losing its core military recruitment and dissolving
into political factions and territories it became a patchwork of separated
fiefs ruled over by grasping and violent rulers.

If History is
any guide and we are unable to defend ourselves in any conventional war and the
Atlantic Isles becomes an area of small states in constant dispute, who will
pick up the pieces?